Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    February 15, 2014 3:00pm-3:31pm PST

3:00 pm
3:01 pm
3:02 pm
3:03 pm
3:04 pm
3:05 pm
3:06 pm
3:07 pm
3:08 pm
3:09 pm
3:10 pm
3:11 pm
3:12 pm
3:13 pm
3:14 pm
3:15 pm
3:16 pm
3:17 pm
3:18 pm
3:19 pm
3:20 pm
3:21 pm
>> please notice the stabilization amount. this is a number that we adjust the projected rate by policy which you and i to amortize over 3
3:22 pm
years. i don't know the best way to do this but there is another document that i need to review that tells me how i got the $7 million. >> all right. if you call out the tab and be patient with us. >> let's go to tab 8 of your booklet. it is actually -- it's actually tab 8 in your booklet. it's a city plan uac rate stabilization. i think that this is incredible what's happened. the way we generally present this is i know we have the answer on page 1, but the math of how we get to the answer is actually on page 2.
3:23 pm
so i would like to, can you go to page 2? there you go. can everybody see that okay? this is pretty amazing. we at this point in time thought that this thing needed $38,000 put into it for this period of time. when we built the rates for 2013, not 14. we looked at it and put $38,000 of prior money into rates because that's where we were. we were actually draining cash out of the system in the last year, they flat increased for the retirees. all the others exploded in a positive direction. at the end of the day, if you notice that number there, can everybody hear me okay? it's $17 million. so this thing generated $17 million. so i think the net
3:24 pm
difference of that amount of money, this is as expected. i take that number and carry that amount over to page 1. so on page one last year we were carrying for $4 million. it was doing so well. this year we are carrying a total of $17 million. we add those two numbers together. this is a 3-year policy which i inherited which is a fantastic policy. you have this from my prior consultant. when i read it, i thought it was really smart. this money goes back to the people. it's all about bringing the money back to the plan and adjusting where needed. the rule is you take a third of this new surplus prior surplus in $7 million $431,000 will be put against
3:25 pm
the rates. let's remember that number. $7431, 000. is there another way to make that bigger? i guess that. if you see that, and your paper says that, if we run our stabilization down at 15, at the bottom it says $7431, we took the rate by $7 million. point of interest. i want to point out one rate to you. it's the adjusted with stabilization reserve. our mapd rate from kaiser is 24.
3:26 pm
these medicare rates are on the -- medicaid cob. we are less than $100. that's an amazing number comparing your two other vendors. it's like wow, this is something else. maybe there is an opportunity here. i don't know, i'm happy for the city plan that this has happened. on we go, we looked at this and applied $7 million and the decrease is fantastic. on the back i have three rate cards. i won't go on and on about this. we'll be here all day. the point is to show you that some still have the zero, that's the status quo and some of the 90/10 and
3:27 pm
then the 93, 83. to take away from this is this in 2015 we subsidized hsf for those people who decided to go to 9383. those people will no longer be subsidized. those people would have to pay now what is a tentative rate of $320 for singles. that's not great. and so because it's capped at the second highest plate. it's a complicated formula. there will be people who i think is in the best interest to educate them that your rate is going up so they don't say, i just got a bill for $320 that i just got taken out of my paycheck. where the other people who it doesn't apply, that is a zero. this is a discussion item. i have shared this. i think it is
3:28 pm
incredibly good news. i'm not thrilled about the 10-piece. are there any questions because that's basically my discussion about the rate status at this point? >> are there questions by members of the board? >> i would like to go back to page one. the number of the members, is that as of 2013? >> yes. >> with the new enrollment as of 2014, are there big changes from december 2013 and the new calendar year? >> can i have lisa? >> is it similar? >> thank you, the question is regarding the city plan enrollment for 2014. for the active -- really across all of the plans there is protection against those members in terms of significant financial exposure in 2014 so we did not see a lot of movement. we are
3:29 pm
continuing to see that decline. where we'll see the major reduction in participation for both active and early retiree will be in 2015 where we have the hetch hetchy people who have the stipend for supporting in that plan. otherwise it's going to be difficult to have anyone who are going to be able to afford the rates in 15 which would be preliminary for an e only, $411 and $300 a month for the 9093 people. >> it's close to the same? >> it's very little movement in 2014. keep everything stable both blue shield and city plan stable and try to get the mou agreements fixed
3:30 pm
for 2015 to at least save blue shield. that was our intent. we were successful in that. the demographic report will come to the board at the march meeting. >> one more question for lisa? you are presenting a status quo 910 and 9310, are we expecting almost all unions to move to 9310 in 2015? >> there is no one left on the status quo. no unions left on the hundred percent. there are about half of our membership because one of our largest union is on a plan that would be the 9010 as of july. so i would say that we have at least half of our membership in the 9010.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on